Andrew Luster's case in hands of judge

After going down a litany of reasons why the judge should consider reducing convicted rapist Andrew Luster’s 124-year sentence, his lawyer said the sentence should be closer to 20 years.

David Nick said former District Attorney Michael Bradbury recently suggested the shorter sentence.

“Now, he says 20 years,” Nick said Friday during closing arguments in a hearing that lasted more than a week.

Luster, 49, an heir to the Max Factor cosmetics fortune, was convicted in 2003 of drugging and raping three women at his Mussel Shoals home north of Ventura. He fled to Mexico before his trial ended and was convicted and sentenced to 124 years in absentia.

An appeals court granted his lawyers a writ of habeas corpus last year. They are asking the judge to reduce his sentence and set aside the conviction.

Nick referred to a statement Bradbury made that was entered as a stipulation by the prosecutors and defense attorneys.

In his statement, which was read in court, Bradbury said he would have rejected the plea agreement of eight to 12 years that was offered 10 years ago. A 20-year plea agreement would have been taken more seriously by prosecutors, Bradbury noted.

Luster’s lawyers insist prosecutors offered a plea agreement of eight to 12 years. They argued that Luster would have accepted the agreement if he had been properly counseled by his former lawyers.

But prosecutor Michelle Contois described Luster as a man who hired many lawyers, who testified they cautioned him about the pitfalls of going to trial and risking a long prison sentence.

“He believed he was innocent. He could not accept prison and he rejected the plea,” Contois said.

She said that even if then-prosecutor John Blair had made this offer it would have been rejected by Bradbury.

Retired Judge Kathryne Stoltz told lawyers she will review the evidence and make a ruling possibly by next Friday.

Nick, who gave a PowerPoint presentation that lasted several hours, told Stoltz that the defense is requesting a new sentencing hearing, a new trial and a minimum sentence.

Defense attorneys argue Luster will have to serve just 50 percent of the sentence he receives because the crimes weren’t violent.

Nick said Luster was represented by ineffective counsel. He also said Judge Ken Riley stacked the sentences on the counts, which, Nick argued, was illegal because there weren’t “appreciable breaks” between each sex act. This is an element required by law to run sentences consecutively or concurrently.

Nick said Luster wasn’t allowed to use consent as a defense and the judge gave the jury inappropriate instructions.

Luster testified that he fled to Mexico because his former lawyer, Richard Sherman, told him the court system was corrupt and he would be murdered in prison.

“Undeniably, his flight was the biggest aggravation of all this,” Nick said.

Contois countered: “He fled voluntarily.”

She said Luster kept a hit list with names of district attorney prosecutors, investigators, Bradbury and others who he felt had done him wrong.

Nick said it wasn’t a hit list because the name of one of Luster’s lawyers, Roger Diamond, was on it.

“Payback List” was written above the names, according to the evidence.